ohhoneyno_ t1_jaclr30 wrote on February 28, 2023 at 1:55 PM

Science says first cousins don't have much higher risk for genetic issues than regular people do. Mountain lions are known to puncture skulls and sever spinal chords in humans.

Saint_Circa OP t1_jacuw3o wrote on February 28, 2023 at 3:02 PM

We're not talking about first and second cousins in the case of feral people though. We're talking about first and second cousins also being your sister as well.

Mountain lions are known to split spinal chords and create puncture wounds in the skull, but we've also found skulls that are without a doubt the result of eagles carrying off people. The "Taung skull" being the most notorious. Even modern eagles today are known to attack livestock animals as big as 500lbs. We also know for a fact that very large eagles exsited, and would have existed alongside humans. The Haasts eagle and the Argentavis being two.

ohhoneyno_ t1_jacww0x wrote on February 28, 2023 at 3:16 PM

Who can say that a family unit of uncles and aunts like a multi-generational household (often seen during the great depression and to this day per certain cultures) weren't those who decided to go off the grid? Imagine you're dying of starvation and you have this idea that might make you suffer less, wouldn't you tell your brother? Your sister? Your cousin? I think the failure here is to disregard the fact that the US isn't an isolated island like say Papa New guinea. There's millions of people, even in smaller towns. Let's say it becomes like the trail of tears and many don't make it, we still would have tens to dozens who do, probably of different families. I can buy into the idea of feral people who became feral as a result of purposeful isolation, but not that we are saying only one immediate family unit is doing this.

Saint_Circa OP t1_jacylfk wrote on February 28, 2023 at 3:27 PM

I don't really understand what you're saying here. Or how it differs from what I'm saying rather. I think you're looking at 'family' from a nuclear family perspective. Whereas in great depression era families it was very common for aunts and uncles and grandmothers and grandfathers to all be a part of the same household. This is what made tenement buildings so disgusting.

Cousins reproducing after one generation probably wouldn't have a major result at least physically, but the further you go the more messed up things get.

The most prevalent case of things like this occurring would be the "Blue family" of Kentucky.

but overall, There were several loopholes in the feral people theory that led me to dismiss the feral people theory. As I clearly stated in my account.

ohhoneyno_ t1_jaczgr5 wrote on February 28, 2023 at 3:33 PM

The point is that this wouldn't start or end with one nuclear family merging. It would keep splitting because you're no longer looking at a nuclear family. You're looking at an extended family who would progressively branch out. So, yes, maybe your brother is your first cousin but what if your second cousin gets on with a first generation? We would have to be assuming that only one subset of family members are reproducing with others of that one subset like cousins for example but it would be more complex than that because a second cousin (the child of two first cousins) could procreate with a first aunt or an original settler. Do you see what I mean? You can inbreed somewhat safely and that's why Papua new guinea has stable tribes. What if we consider a possible Hills Have Eyes/Roanoke theory? What if, instead of eating/cannibalizing hikers, we bring them into the family so to speak? Elderly, not so much, but children? Thats new breeding stock.